MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235254860 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12154

Low Latency Compressive Sensing using Multi-Resolution Analysis In Radar Signal Processing

2017· dissertation· en· W4235254860 on OpenAlexaff
Assem Assem

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSparse and Compressive Sensing Techniques
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNyquist rateNyquist–Shannon sampling theoremCompressed sensingComputer scienceBandwidth (computing)WaveletSignal processingSIGNAL (programming language)AlgorithmElectronic engineeringReal-time computingRadarSampling (signal processing)TelecommunicationsComputer visionEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The digital world becomes dominated by electronic devices. The demand for higher speeds is growing every day which implies a higher demand for the signal acquisition and processing speeds and a wider signal bandwidth. The analog-to-digital converter (ADC) is the first step in the digital world. As stated by the Shannon/Nyquist sampling theorem, the ADC must sample the signal at a rate two times faster than the signal bandwidth in order to avoid data loss. However, the advances of ADC cannot always meet these demands. Therefore, considerable research has been done to find new approaches to acquiring the signal at a rate lower than the Nyquist rate (sub-Nyquist) while capturing the data with no losses or distortion. In recent years, compressive sensing (CS) has come to light as a new signal processing paradigm. CS exploits signal sparsity characteristics to acquire the signal using a number of samples much lower than the Nyquist rate. Our focus is studying CS and its applications to radar. We study different successful CS practical implementation approaches. However, these approaches lead to an undesired high-latency in the computation and signal reconstruction.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.408
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.260 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSparse and Compressive Sensing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207